Uncyclopedia:VFH/The 9/11 Commission Report (3rd nom)

VFH overview

All nominations

Feature queue

Re-feature queue

Recently featured

Recently failed

Archive

Rules

The 9/11 Commission Report (history, logs) (feature) (remove)

Article: The 9/11 Commission Report	Score: 8 insensitive fuckers
Nominated by:	Mattsnow 06:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
For: 9	Nom and for Yeah it's controversial, but is it funny is what you may ask yourselves before voting. Mattsnow 06:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)  For. ~EveryOtherUsernameWasTaken(dtf?) 08:44, 13 July 2015 (UTC)  For. I was six years old in 2001, so I never really understood what happened until now. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 05:50, 17 July 2015 (UTC) I was just about to turn three, so this is even more educational for me. Funnily enough I was talking to this guy recently who had his fourth birthday on 9/11. I said "that must've sucked" he said "at least there were fireworks". But he probably says that one to everyone. ~EveryOtherUsernameWasTaken(dtf?) 09:37, 17 July 2015 (UTC) I'm glad I could make you learn something guys :) Mattsnow 16:06, 18 July 2015 (UTC)  For. И феел а стинг оф регрет вотинг ьФорь бут итьс ацтуаллы qуите а нице артицле. И ликед wхат тхе отхерс саид. (#refugeinaudacity) MUN MyOwnBadSelf, The BFDI Fan (talk - stalk - block) 09:45, 17 July 2015 (UTC)  For. -- MagicBus Talk to me! 17:04, 19 July 2015 (UTC)  For. IFYMB! Talk to me baby! 08:31, 20 July 2015 (UTC)  Funny. ~[ths] UotM 07:08, 07/21/2015  For. Loved it. GrammarFegelein (Chat) (Things) (CTAM) I Fuck Fix up articles. 11:55, 21 July 2015 (UTC)  For. Filial Piety 2.0 ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 06:02, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Against: 1	Against. Sorry, Matt, I just don't feel this is your best work. I read the article's talkpage, the IP's angry comment, your answers to him, the previous nominations (not counting the article itself), and I still can't be sure whether you are ridiculing a conspiracy theory or the 9/11 official story. The official version has a lot of significant flaws, but instead of making fun of them, you seem to be trying to build a conspiracy theory out of very scarce evidence, often quickly jumping to conclusions. The choice of humour tactics seems a bit poor in my opinion; in some places it's just plain sarcasm. This doesn't have the desired effect if the reader is either completely unfamiliar with the 9/11 details (which I was before today) or well-familiar with them (after reading a few Wikipedia pages, I admit), because he either doesn't understand your joke or sees that your theory has flaws, too. Sorry, if this is overly critical, because I know you put hard work into it, and I just feel this piece doesn't do justice to your writing skills! Anton (talk) 18:14, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Thanks, but I don't think I have much more writing skills :D Mattsnow 19:55, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Comments	Comment. I think it's OK, but i'd like to see a few tweaks to make it a bit more deadpan. Leverage (talk) 21:18, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

VFH

---

← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH

Click to feature this article

Always check the feature queue first.

---

Note: the queue slot won't be properly filled until the {{FA}} code (with correct date) is on the article.
Just follow the instructions if you're unsure.

---